* Eli Marmor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> 7. Elegance.

I tend to disagree. 

XML configuration is not elegant. Especially when you need to start quoting
shell stuff and regexps for XML.
XML configs are huge. This will blow up a typical 8k configuration file at
least to 32k or more.
XML is slow and less powerful compared to the current system.

Anyway, I'm willing to get convinced when I see a new configuration system
which (a) maps the current behaviour and complexities (b) does more than
that and (c) make configuration of the httpd on a server system (no gui!)
easier. Otherwise it's wasted time.

Good luck!

nd

Reply via email to